Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Unified Memory 16GB is shared You need 32GB
- Thread starter TheRealAlex
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I got 32GB RAM in part because I envision MacOS supporting more and more widgets, which may become available outside of the sidebar (i.e. on the desktop, like the home screen in iOS) - on top of being able to run more and more iOS apps on MacOS (which I would plan on doing). Combining iOS apps + more widgets on top of all the MacOS applications I have open - that 32 GB may come in handy.
I would really love this feature. Right now I use old iPhones to display widgets under my monitors. I have an iPhone 7+ and it displays my calendar and the weather (large format) and an iPhone 6s displaying the stock indices from the Fidelity App. I also use an iPad 2 (not an iPad Air 2) as a large desk clock. An iPad mini 5 could display all of my widgets but it would be a waste of an iPad mini 5. I wish that widgets were in older versions of iOS. If they were in macOS, though, it would be perfect as I wouldn't have to look down to see things.
The layout of Notifications isn't great, either, with only a sidebar compared to full-screen.
You say that, but the fact I see so many use a Mac for little more than a Facebook machine says otherwise. As does the amount of people complaining about the look of the machine and finding that massively more important than its actual performance.
My 2008 MacBook was artificially limited to 4GB by Apple. I had to hack it to enable 8GB, which was the limit as only 4GB chips were available at the time, and the machine only held 2 chips. 8GB chips didn't hit market until later 2008. Most laptops were limited to 2 RAM slots, unless you had a high-end gaming or workstation replacement which sometimes had 4 slots, each allowing up to 4GB pre-2008. So yes... my statement is correct. In 2008 8GB was the limit for the large bulk of laptops, and in many cases Desktops too. In 2010 Apple was still limiting RAM upgradability in the MBP to 8GB. They didn't offer a 16GB option till 2013.
Last edited:
Yes, technically you were incorrect. Of course you had to add a lot of caveats to be correct.
friend, can you check out my post and let me know if your sentiment remains? much appreciated ? https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/help-16gb-or-32gb-on-m1-istats-included.2330220/
This. Exactly this. 16g of ram works absolutely fantastic for 99% of the users on here. Don't fall for this stuff.
There are cases where GPU goes over 48Gb+ of VRAM, so 32Gb RAM is really not enough for machines like this.
....ooooor, it depends on what you use. You do know that for the vast majority of users, VRAM rarely goes above a gigabyte or two, even for graphically intensive apps? It *really* depends on your workflow.
Last edited:
It's really easy to understand, for the vast majority of workflows you don't need more than 16. I use a lot of illustration and 3D software and my swap file is 0 for most of the time, and even when it goes beyond that the performance remains unaffected.
Did you actually test how these Macs work when it comes to specific, different tasks and workflows? No? Then you gave arbitrary advice.
I have 128 GB of RAM in my Windows desktop. I have 16 GB arriving tomorrow which I will put in my 2014 iMac 27 for 32 GB of RAM. I do run virtual machines from time to time. Largest systems I've used had 1.4 TB of RAM.
Some people do need more than 16 GB of RAM and they post in these forums.
Of course. Some people need more than 16. Some people don't need more than 16. You can't say 16 is enough and you can't say 16 is not enough before you know what people use their computers for.
Shared memory or not, 16 will be enough for a lot of pro users. Not all. Some people need 32, 64 and beyond. But the OP (and many posts here) sound like 16 is not enough for the majority of users (including pro ones), which is just not true. I'm one example where it is enough. You're one example where it isn't. It's simple, really. The answer is - shockingly - it depends (tm).
My statement was that people here aren't average.
You pointed out that you're one person here that is happy with 16 GB. I pointed out that I'm one that isn't.
I'm a big fan of used equipment. I bought a 2009 iMac many years ago and it came with 4 GB of RAM. 4 GB of RAM is woefully inadequate these days given the size of web pages so I threw in 16 and it's a usable machine. I just bought a 2014 iMac and it came with 16 GB of RAM but I think that it only shipped with 8 GB in the base model. So I'm adding another 16 GB and running a couple of 4k monitors off of it. Those systems are really nice in that you can inexpensively add RAM. So you don't have to worry about expansion needs down the road.
My 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros came with 16 GB and that was the only option. No more, no less. I'm quite happy that Apple expanded RAM offerings in later models. I think that it's interesting that the longest lead times on MacBook Pros are on the 64 GB models. It appears that there are lots of people willing to pay some pretty steep prices for additional memory.
Apple clearly realized that there are a decent number of people that wanted more than 16 GB of RAM quite some time ago. If you want to use your system for a decade or more, then getting more than 16 GB may be a wise move.
All true, but the OP clearly indicated 16 is not enough (for anyone) because of the shared memory. It depends. There is a decent number of people that want more than 16, indeed. That doesn't mean that if your workflow doesn't require that much RAM, you should get it because the memory is shared. For a lot of people, 16 *is* enough.
Now, I doubt I will not buy a new Mac in the next decade, but I think in 10 years a lot of things on your current Mac will be way too old anyway.
I like to use clusters - that is several smaller systems to make a larger system. I put things that require a lot of CPU on newer systems and stuff that doesn't require as many resources as older systems. I was using a 2009 iMac until last week. I may still use it when I decide where things go when my additional RAM arrives tomorrow. I used my 2007 MacBook Pro 17 until 2018 when it died. I may sell the 2014 MacBook Pro as I have the 2021 and the 2015; but that only means that someone else will use it.
So in short:
You do really obscure stuff and have some systems that have a lot of RAM.
You failed to proove that anybody else would need that much of RAM or even that you really need it.
As for RAM demand going up in the past, true. But also no proof that it will do so in the next few year for most users (Pro or not).
I personally think that we have reached the point of dimishing returns and wouldn't be surprised if 16GB was still good enough for most of us by the end of the decade.
People still buying Windows laptops with 4GB isn't proof that they are useable for even the most basic tasks.
People "futureproofing" by buying more RAM(CPU/storage) than they need today doesn't proof that they will actually need it.
My current thought is, I'll buy M1Pro MacMini with the same specs as the base 14" MBP if it is priced right (<1500€) and use till Apple ups the base RAM on the M2-8Pro to 32GB.
Depending on how far out that is I might still loose less on selling M1Pro than it would have been buying it with 32GB.
People buy 18-core Xeon W iMac Pros with 64 GB RAM. I don't know of a lot of people spending $10K to future-proof.